The Germanna Reiner family originated in Schwaigern, W�rttemberg.  The first member of the family to come to Virginia was Maria Barbara, who had married Johann Michael Koch.  Then 32 years later, her brother, Johann Dieterich Reiner, arrived with his family, a wife and five children.  The oldest child, Hans Dieterich, was born in 1716, and the youngest surviving child, Eberhardt, was born in 1733.  Eberhardt, age 17, purchased 530 acres from Ambrose Powell in 1750, the year after they had arrived in Philadelphia.  Eberhardt never married, but the other children all did.  The girls were married very quickly; it almost seems as if they were engaged before they arrived.

When Eberhard wrote his will, he mentioned his sister (Mary) Margaret (born 1723), who seemed to be married to a Withauer or Witham.  The latter name is to be found in �Hebron Communion Lists�, where the spelling is Wittem, Withim, or Wittim.  At the first mention, in 1784, Margaret would have been 61, and she was listed as a widow.  Normally, a listing as a widow is close to the time that widowhood commences, but in 1789 she is also listed as a widow.  The last mention for her is in 1796, when she was 73 years old.

A correspondent writes that a Peter Witham seems to have been born in Culpeper County in 1763.  If Margaret was his mother, she would have forty years old, which is possible.  Except for the reference to Culpeper County and an age match that is ok, I know of no evidence that Peter Witham was the son of Margaret.  There are no Withams in �The Culpeper Classes�, nor in the Personal Property Tax Lists for 1789.  Therefore, the family does not seem to have been numerous in Culpeper at the time of the Revolution, which increases the chances that Peter is the son of Margaret.

Peter Witham�s Revolutionary War Pension Application said that he was a private in the company of Captain Fisher Rice and they marched to Jamestown, where a skirmish took place, and then they retreated and marched back to Culpeper where he was discharged.  He also served three months in the company of Abros Bohannon.  Another time he served at Yorktown at the time of the battle, but was marched to Winchester to guard prisoners.  He also served in the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion in western Pennsylvania in 1794 or 1795.  Peter was born 9 March 1763.

A descendant, it appears, of Peter, one Nancy Witham, married John Agee in the Nineteenth Century.  The Agees were Huguenots and descended from one Mathew Agee, who appears to be the only Agee who came to America.  Allied names to the Agee family include Dickinson or Dickens.  The name Agee is probably to be identified as the same as the name Acree, who appears in the Culpeper Classes.  His first name was William.
(04 Jun 04)

The Mid-Atlantic Germanic Society (MAGS) is doing something different for their Fall meeting.  (Yes, I know that summer is not even here.)  MAGS will meet at the Best Western Gettysburg Hotel in (take a guess) Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.  The date is 16 October.

One speaker, Dr. Roger Minert, will give three presentations on the general theme of Researching German Ancestors.  Dr. Minert is qualified to talk about different aspects of this broad topic.  He is a professional researcher in Germany and Austria.  His degree was in Foreign Language Education and he is currently with the Family History Library in Salt Lake City where he specializes in German research and translation.  He is the associate editor of the German Genealogical Digest, and he has published fifteen books in the field of German family history.  (He hardly looks to be old enough to have done all this.)

One ninety-minute presentation is an Introduction to Identifying and Locating Church and Vital Records for Towns and Cities in Germany.  In each time period, the emphasis will be on the types of records that are available.  There will be some discussion of historical events which has affected record keeping.  A handout will include data on church record inventories in the LDS Family History Library.

Another of the topics will cover Marriage and Courtship in Germany from 1500 to 1800.  Seldom did couples marry outside their social class.  Dr. Minert will provide insight into the details of how our ancestors met, courted, and married.

The third topic is an Introduction to German Phonetics As It Applies to the Spelling of Personal Names.  This is another ninety-minute presentation which will provide researchers with a good foundation in variant spellings of personal names and how they differ over time and location.  What seems like helter-skelter variations, can be summarized in basic rules of German phonetics.  Linguistic explanations for specific spelling changes will be given.

If you are interested in attending, you can register by sending a letter to:

Diane M. Kuster
251 Serpentine Dr
Bayville, NJ 08721-3261

The information is a little late, but I would like to notify you of the National Conference of the Palatines to America, which will be held June 24-27 in Albany, New York.  Even though time is short, I will bet that you can get in.

Thursday, June 24:
There will be a bus tour to Schoharie Valley, New York.
In the evening, Richard Pauling will be the host as Conrad Weiser

Friday, June 25:
John Humphrey, "Developing Skills to Become a Genealogist"
Lion Miles, "Hessian Ancestors"
Richard Pauling, "Erie Canal Boat Captain"
Diane Ptak, "Chasing Those Elusive Loyalists"
At the banquet, John Humphrey will be the speaker

Saturday, June 26:
Diane Ptak, "Locating That Elusive Link"

Rev. David Jay Weber, "What a Genealogist Research Needs to Know to Make the Best Use of Colonial Church Records"
Bus tour to Saratoga Battlefield

If you have any questions, contact:

John M. Paris III
Droms Rd Ext
East Glenville, NY 12302-5304

Dorothy Ambergey Griffith recently informed the List about the Ambergey Reunion to be held this coming July.  To find the full details, Col. Griffith (yes, she is an honorary Colonel of Kentucky) sent us to the web page for the family (www.ambergeyfamily.org).  I am not an Amberger descendant but I look fondly on the family and its people.

My general introduction to them was on the occasion of a "Friday-before-the-Germanna-Reunion-get-together" of nineteen of the Ambergey family members.  I led the group to the land parcels of the 1717 Conrad Amberger in the Mt Pony area, the boundaries of which would later would become the Culpeper-Madison county line.  Next, we visited the Hebron Church which had been opened for us.  Another visitor to the Church at the same time, Thom Faircloth, played the organ for us.  The group then went to the restaurant in downtown Madison (now closed) where we ate supper together.  We had a great time together, which was marred only by the heat wave which was melting the tar in the road.

The Hitt family has a history of special meetings at the Germanna Reunion and I believe more families should try for this sort of thing.  This makes a special reason for family members to attend the Germanna Reunion by having the bonus of a family meeting.

A. L. Keith thought all of the 1717 Colony moved to the Robinson River Valley at the same time.  He was wrong about this.  Christopher Zimmerman and Conrad Amberger moved to the Mt Pony area, which is outside the Robinson River Valley.  Zimmerman remained the rest of his life there, but Conrad Amberger moved closer to the larger German community of the Second Colony people.  The family was still quite a distance from the German Lutheran Church, and they seem not to have been involved in it.

One of the things that I like about the Ambergey Family Association is that they have a scholarship fund to help any Amberger descendant with his/her college expenses.  Some of their fund raising (and fun raising) is in connection with this fund.

****

Tomorrow is my turn at the Hans Herr House.  The forecast is for beautiful weather.  The Director was just saying that the talks given by ALL of the Saturday guides have brought forth comments such as, "Best house tour that I have ever been on."  The basic reason for this is that the story is very interesting and the visual aspects are very good.
(12 Jun 04)

It is my intention to develop the general theme that the 1709 emigration from Germany was influential on the later emigrations, especially the 1713 and 1717 emigrations, which pertain to the Germanna Colonies.  We have known there were connections between the 1709 emigration and those who came later.  This was brought out Sunday during a visit to the Conrad Weiser homestead here in Pennsylvania.

(John) Conrad Weiser, in "The Autobiography of John Conrad Weiser (1696 - 1760)", tells us that he was married in 1720 by John Frederick H�ger, Reformed pastor.  This Frederick H�ger was the son of Rev. Henry H�ger of the Germanna Colonies.

First, this reminds us that a very near relative of a member of the First Colony did leave Germany in 1709 (and arrived in New York in 1710).

Conrad Weiser's statement is interesting because he identifies Frederick H�ger as Reformed, and not as an Anglican.  We know that Frederick Hager studied theology with the intent of becoming a Reformed pastor; however, he was never ordained as a Reformed pastor, though he was licensed to preach.  He then decided to join the emigration of 1709, and, while he was in London, he asked, with support from some other Germans, for support from the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel (SPG), which required him to be ordained in the Anglican faith.  They did and he was.  We believe that the only faith in which he was ordained was Anglican.  He received support from the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel to minister to the Germans in New York and to convert them to the Anglican faith.

His letters to the SPG emphasize that he is trying to establish the Anglican faith among the Germans; however, he did have some difficulty in obtained the promised funds from the SPG.

The question is whether, in 1720, he was acting as a Reformed pastor among the Germans, or whether he was truly trying to instill Anglican principles among the Germans.  Perhaps the latter was the case but the Germans still saw him as a Reformed pastor.  Perhaps he had become disillusioned with the SPG and the Anglicans over their lack of (financial) support and reverted to calling himself, and thinking of himself as, Reformed.

His exact status has always been a problem, but it does seem that he was ordained only as an Anglican.  Still, his German parishioners may have thought of him as Reformed.  So was he Anglican or Reformed?  One can quote contemporary sources to say that he was both, but technically he could not have been both at the same time.
(15 Jun 04)

Johann Friedrich H�ger, the son of Rev. H�ger of the First Colony, wrote several letters from New York to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in London (and to his parents).  Many of these have been published in �Ecclesiastical Records of the State of New York�.  His early attempts along the Hudson River to convert the Germans to the Anglican faith were thwarted in part by the already present Justus Falckner, a Lutheran minister.

One of the letters of Friedrich H�ger was written in June 1712.  He told Mr. Chamberlayne of the SPG that he had received a letter from Chamberlayne with an enclosure from H�ger�s father.  He told Chamberlayne,

�My parents press me hard from hence.  I am not able to assist them [...].  I recommend to you my parents in case they should come to England, that some provision may be made for them.�

Considering the very slow mails which were done in stages, this is a very early document relating to Rev. Heinrich H�ger�s emigration plans.  Surely, by the end of 1711, and probably even earlier, he and his wife had reached the decision to emigrate to America.

(Friedrich H�ger gave instructions for the routing of a letter to his parents which he was enclosing in the letter to Chamberlayne.

�Of the enclosed letter to my father [...] direct it first to Mr. John Behagel, near the Bank, at Amsterdam, and then to his brother Isaak Behagel, at Frankfort, who were formerly my father�s disciples; or to Mr. Langhen at Saxenhausen near Frankfort, who is to send it further to Mr. Nesser at Siegen, who will deliver it without fail to my father.�

This merely shows the difficulty and the delays to be encountered in sending mail.  The Behagel brothers had been involved in the Frankfurt-Pennsylvania land company, which had played a role in the founding of Germantown in Philadelphia, showing that the H�gers had more than one connection to America.)

By 1711, Heinrich H�ger had already made solid plans to go to America.  Certainly, the son was a major factor in this decision, but there was another.  Franz Ludwig Michel had met Justus Albrecht in Holland and hired him to find miners in Germany.  As a part of his recruitment efforts, Albrecht executed a Deed Poll by which he promised to give money to the Siegen ministers.  This was in 1711 on 15 August.

Rev. Heinrich H�ger did leave Oberfischbach in 1713, but apparently he was unaccompanied by any of the other members of what became the First Germanna Colony.  It is recorded that Jacob Holtzklau had no known schedule for leaving when the H�ger family left.

There were many influences leading to the decision of the Henrich H�ger family to emigrate, but certainly the earlier emigrations to American played an important part.  More information on the material in this Note is to be found in Beyond Germanna on page 798.
(16 Jun 04)

William Penn came into possession of Pennsylvania about 1680 as a repayment for the debt of the Crown to the Penn family.  This was a lot of land, and the only way that Penn could achieve any economic gain was to sell pieces of the land.  He was very realistic about prices and believed it was better to sell a lot of land at a low price rather than sell a small amount at a high price.  In his personal outlook, he was a member of the Society of Friends (Quakers), but very tolerant toward other religions.

About the time that Penn acquired Pennsylvania, he personally traveled up the Rhine River (toward the south) with a message that there was lots of cheap land in Pennsylvania and one could exercise his own religion if he did not disturb the rights of others.  There should have been an audience to whom this was appealing.  The French were invading every few years into the region along the Rhine.  The Mennonites (Anabaptists in general) lived under pressure of the rulers.  And after Penn left Germany, agents of his were active in recruiting.

There was a very limited response initially, resulting only in the formation of Germantown just outside of Philadelphia.  Thirty years later, say around 1708, the number of Germans who had gone to America could be enumerated on one sheet of paper (with small writing).  Through this period there was no shortage of good reasons for emigration.  In Nassau-Siegen the actions of the Catholic Prince had caused a severe slow down in the economic life of the region and jobs were scarce.  (See the article by Heinz Prinz in Beyond Germanna, page 855.)

The tentative mystery to present day observers is why so few Germans had accepted the call of William Penn to take advantage of his proposals.  On analysis, it appears that the Germans were emigrating to new lands, but they were choosing to go east, not west.  Why east and not west?  A trip to the east was by land (perhaps with some river travel) while a trip to the west involved an ocean voyage.  It is not clear why there was such a negative opinion of the ocean.  There was some reason to be afraid of ocean travel because of the uncertainties and danger to life, but how did the Germans learn these facts if so few were going across the ocean?

There were also questions about how to finance the trip.  Those going east had often been recruited by a ruler who assisted them.  No one was helping those going west, and the expenses seemed to be high, besides being unknown.  So, most of the potential emigrants were moving east and not west.
(17 Jun 04)

Up to 1709, few Germans had emigrated to America.  It started with the group that founded Germantown in Philadelphia in 1683, to which there were additions through the years, but certainly nothing very large.  Then in 1708, Joshua Kocherthal led a small group (41 people) who claimed to be refugees of the war in the Palatinate.  They had sought support from the English government, but none was forthcoming.  Nevertheless, they continued on the way, seeking aid from people along the way.  Thus, they became an advance publicity team for those who came in later years.  At Rotterdam, they obtained passage to London from the English.  In London, the party renewed its solicitation for help and some ministers decided they should have help to include a few additional Germans who came late.  The place to which they were sent was the Hudson River and the project was naval stores to justify the expense of sending them.

This was a semi-official project with support and objectives determined by the government.  At first it went well, but within a few months there was a change of administration due to death.  Kocherthal found himself in financial straits.  Seeing no relief in New York, he decided to return to England to plead his case.  In December 1709, he appeared before the Board of Trade with a proposal for viticulture.  He argued that the eventual return from vineyards could be more profitable to the Crown than sugar or tobacco.

At the time that Kocherthal was in London, the city was inundated with thousands of Germans who were seeking transportation to America.  Many observers assumed that Kocherthal was in some way related to these Germans, but, in fact, it was mostly a coincidence.  To a small extent, his departure from Germany a year before had been a publicity vanguard for the concept of emigration to America.  Much more telling, he had written a "Report" in 1706 which encouraged Germans to consider the New World.  In 1709, four more printings of this booklet were made, but this was not done by him.

Kocherthal returned to New York without having gained much support from the English government.  His group merged with the 1709 group and had a similar history in the years ahead.
(18 Jun 04)

Up to the start of the year 1709, we have seen that the numbers of German emigrants could be measured in, at the most, a hundred per year.  And this overstates the case, as many years there were no emigrants.  The emigration started in 1683 with less that a hundred people and additions, probably in the tens per year, were made over the years.  These people founded and lived in Germantown in Philadelphia.  Then in 1708, another large group, under Kocherthal, made their way to New York.  When I say large, it is only comparative.  It amounted to fewer than a hundred people, but in comparison to the averages of the previous years it was large.

Then in 1709 something unusual happened.  Before the year was over some 13,000 Germans had left their homes for the New World.  Something radical happened in this year.  What was it?

One of the most frequently mentioned causes for the emigration was war; however, this does not hold up under examination, because war had been a way of life for a century.  It leaves unanswered the question of why the Germans had not emigrated earlier.  Also, the Germans came from the Palatinate, the districts of Darmstadt and Hanau, Franconia, various of the church states, Hesse-Darmstadt, Zweibr�cken, Nassau, Alsace, Baden, and W�rttemberg.  Not all of these regions were experiencing war in 1709.  We know that many of our Second Colony villages were suffering from war, yet they sent relatively few people in 1709.  (During the War of the Spanish Succession, Marshal Villars crossed the Rhine unexpectedly in May of 1707 and terrorized southwestern Germany.)

Religion is often cited as a reason, but it is hard to justify as a valid excuse.  The theory is that individuals were prosecuted because of their religious beliefs.  Protestants emigrated from Catholic regions, but so did Catholics from the Catholic regions.  Protestants came from Protestant (Evangelische) regions as did Catholics.  The people who came in 1709 seemed to place no great emphasis on religion, in that they brought few Bibles, hymnals, or other devotional works.

There was an unusual feature at the start of 1709, or the end of 1708.  For ten years or so, Europe had been in a little ice age with unusually cold weather.  This became very severe in the winter of 1708-1709.  By November 1, firewood would not burn in the open.  In January, the wine froze.  Birds died on the wing.  Western Europe was frozen solid, including the sea along the coast.  Many fruit trees were killed, vineyards were destroyed, and winter crops died.  Certainly there were people in the spring of 1709 who felt that everything had been destroyed and this would be a good time to start over in another environment.  It would take more than this to convince 13,000 people to leave Germany.  Who knew what it was like where they were going?
(21 Jun 04)

There were still other possible reasons that the Germans left their homeland in 1709.  Taxes had become an increasing problem especially in light of the dimensioning incomes of the people.  Incomes were under pressure because the population had grown dramatically by immigration into Germany after the Thirty Years' War and by natural increase.  The amount of land available to each individual was decreasing.  Many citizens were forced to try and earn a living in some way besides farming but most people needed some land to supplement their wages.

Why were taxes increasing?  The many rulers of the principalities in Germany saw or heard of the splendor of Versailles in France, and they wanted to emulate the gorgeous court life surrounding Louis XIV.  The big difference was that Louis had a much larger population base to support his whims.  But, when the von Gemmingens in Gemmingen, or the Neippergs in Schwaigern, wanted to build a new home, the burden fell very heavily on the limited number of people.

Germans waiting in Holland in 1709 for transportation to England stated they came flying "...to shake off the burdens they lived under by the hardships of their Princes' governments and the contributions they must pay to the Enemy (i.e., read French)."  In a petition of the Robinson River Valley Lutherans in Virginia, they made specific mention of the "petty princes" who made life hard for them.

As just mentioned, there was a desire, amounting to hunger, for land.  Many of the Germans were essentially landless, and they could offer their children little hope in Germany.  A number of the Palatines (i.e., Germans) in New York were overheard to remark, "We came to America to establish our families and to secure lands for our children on which they will be able to support themselves after we die."

There were plenty of reasons to emigrate, but these same reasons had existed in 1705 or in 1708.  Why did so many Germans pick 1709?  The reasons were no stronger, in general, than they had been in 1703, to pick a year at random.  How did the attraction of a foreign shore come to the Germans in 1709?  What prompted them to take action in 1709?

Every student of German emigration should have the book, "Early Palatine Emigration", by Knittle.  Though it was originally published several decades ago, it has been republished by Genealogical Publishing Company.  I have been, and will be, using this book in this immediate sequence of notes.
(22 Jun 04)

Ulrich Simmendinger was one of the Germans who emigrated in 1709 and was sent to New York.  Later he returned to Germany where he wrote a short book.  His resolution to go to America, he wrote, was under the paternal necessity of providing for his wife and two children.  (The two children died during the trip.) He says nothing of religious persecution.  He did mention genuinely golden promises written by the Englishmen which persuaded him and others to seek their fortune in America.

The 13,000 Germans who did go to London certainly made an impression on the English.  So much so that a parliamentary committee investigated the causes of the emigration.  They took testimony from several of the Germans as to their motives for leaving their native country.  A prominent item in the narratives was a book with the Queen�s (Anne's) picture on the cover and the title page with letters of gold.  For this latter reason, it was called the Golden Book, though the important characteristic of the book was Queen Anne�s picture.  This reinforced the idea that the Queen was inviting Germans and she would assist them.  The suggestion in the book is that Germans who made their way to London would be sent to �Carolina�, or other of her Majesty�s plantations to be settled there.  Most of the book was a recommendation of �Carolina�.  This book was so much in demand by the Germans that three additional printings of it had to be made.

Germans who had wanted to go to America but who had feared the trip and had not the resources to finance the trip now understood they would have the protection of the Queen and she would assist them financially by providing transportation and aid in getting started in �Carolina�.  The appeal was so strong that, when Germans compared notes among themselves, they reinforced each other�s decision to emigrate.  Perhaps we could compare the situation to the snowball effect where one snowball, started on a roll downhill, picks up more snow and which results in an avalanche.  But, more than anything, the year 1709 shows the power of the printed word.

Who was responsible for the �Golden Book�?  Who was the author of it?  These questions are not positively answered, though there are suggestions as to the author, who may have cribbed the major part of it from other writers.  The story in the book was so rosy that the Rev. Anton Wilhelm B�hme, a friend of the Germans in London, felt compelled to write several letters to counteract the propaganda of the �Golden Book�.

Though Queen Anne was favorably inclined toward German Protestants, thirteen thousand Germans were too many for her and for the administration of the national government.  They tried to find a solution for the thirteen thousand, but some of them had to return to Germany.  Word went back to Germany that no more Germans were welcome.  German emigration fell drastically in the next few years until 1717, when about one thousand Germans emigrated.
(23 Jun 04)

There never was an exact count of the number of people who left Germany for the New World in 1709.  The best estimate is thirteen thousand, though some estimates are above this and some below.  Only a fraction of them made it to the New World.  The largest group, about three thousand, went to New York along the Hudson River to work on naval stores.  The members of this group are well known as Hank Z. Jones has made one career of identifying and finding the German origins of these people.  The second largest group for the New World was about six hundred, who went to North Carolina under the leadership of Christoph von Graffenried.

The largest identifiable group, perhaps four thousand, was sent to Ireland.  Many of these stayed indefinitely there while some went back to England on their own and then on to the New World or back to Germany.  Another group was distributed among the villages of England and these families were the least permanent in their distribution.  Most found their way back to London and hence to other places.  Queen Anne did not want Catholics in her plantations and a large number of these were sent back to Germany; however, many of these denied their Catholic origins and sneaked through.

Where did the 1709 emigrants come from?  Let�s take a look at some of the names in the sixth party from Rotterdam to London (sailed 28 July 1709).  These lists were made by the Dutch, and their spelling varies some from German or English.  For example, we have Visher, Fischer, and Fisher in the three nationalities.

Some of the names in the sixth party were:

• Johan Henrig Arendorff [Ohrendorf] and wife and one child
• Albert Becker and wife and one child
• Diderig Fischbag [Fischbach]
• Johan Bast Fischbag and wife and two children
• Joost Fischbag
• Johan Fredrik Heger [H�ger]
• Peeter Heydee and wife and child [�y� substitutes for �i�]
• Johan Eberhard Jung and wife and child
• Anonius L�ck
• Henrig Schneider and wife and one child
• Johan Jacob Schneider
• Johan Henrig Schneider
• Valentyn Schnider and wife and six children
• Johan Diderig Schniter and wife and six children
• Hans Willem Sneider and wife and six children
• Johan Peter Timmerman [probably Zimmerman]
• Koenraet [Conrad] Timmerman
• Joost Visbag [probably Fischbach]
• Johan Jacob Vischbag and wife and seven children
• Maria Katrina Weischgerterin [�in� is feminine ending]
• Johan Mikel Jung and wife
• Jacob Zimmerman and wife and three children

I copied names exactly, but changed the word �vrouw� to �wife�.  I copied out these names because most of the surnames are known in Trupbach and in Oberfischbach.
(24 Jun 04)

In the last note, we had the names of several individuals who could have been from Nassau-Siegen, but the mere duplication of the names does not insure that they were.  Hank Z. Jones did a study of the New York 1709 immigrants with a special emphasis on finding their German origins.  He found the following people in New York with Nassau origins.

• Jacob B�hr of Oberfischbach
• Peter Giesler of Oberfischbach
• Johann Friderich H�ger of Oberfischbach (born in Netphen)
• Johann Henrich Haeger of Anzhausen
• Catharina Heyl of Wilnsdorf
• Hermann Hoffman of Oberfischbach
• Johann Eberhard Jung (not found positively in Nassau but associated with Nassau names)
• Henrich Ohrendorf of Oberfischbach
• Henrich Schramm of Wilnsdorf
• Hyeronimus Weller of Zeppenfeld
• Johannes Zeller

Jacob B�hr had Jacob Cuntz as a sponsor when he was born.  Peter Giesler�s family history has mentions of Peter and Johann Fischbach, and of Oberholzklau.  Peter married Anna Lucia, the daughter of Hermann Hoffman.  Johann Friderich H�ger was the son of Rev. Henry Hager of the First Germanna Colony.  Johann Henrich Haeger was a cousin to Johann Friderich H�ger.  A sponsor of Weller�s sister was Agnes Holtzklau at Salchendorf.  Hyeronimus Weller married Anna Julian, the daughter of Jacob Cuntz.

Also, 107 people emigrated from the Nassau-Dillenberg region in 1709.  Remember that all of the people mentioned so far are only the people who made it to New York.  The New York emigrants were only three thousand out of about thirteen thousand people.  A rational estimate is that several hundred people left the Nassau region in 1709.

Many of the people in the 1713 emigration had relatives in the 1709 emigration.  All of the 1713 emigrants would have been aware of the departure of the 1709 people.  Coupled with the poor economic conditions in Nassau in 1709 and 1713, it is possible to see the strong influence of the 1709 departures on the 1713 emigrants.  The ones in 1709 had shown that it was possible, which encouraged the 1713 group to think it was possible for them.

(From Beyond Germanna, page 36ff.)
(25 Jun 04)

I have recounted that many of the names on the 1709 emigration from Nassau-Siegen were friends and relatives of the 1713 emigrants from Nassau-Siegen.  Thus, the 1713 emigration can be viewed as a continuation of the 1709 emigration.

A similar thing happened in the region which later became Baden-W�rttemberg.  For example, in 1709, Johannes Kugel, Berhard Zipperle, Johannes Keyser, and Georg Lapp, all of Unter�wisheim, left for America and made it to New York.  This was a fairly large number of names from one village.  In 1717, several families left who attended church in Unter�wisheim.  They worshiped there, since their village, Neuenb�rg, had no Protestant Church.  These families included the three Blankenbaker brothers; their sister, Anna Maria, and her husband, John Thomas; the Scheible family; and the Fleshman family.

From Bonfeld, Simon Vogt, Johann Michael Wagelin, Johann Jost Hayd, and Sebastian Wimmer�s widow left in 1709.  They all made it to New York, but Johann Jost Hayd went on to Virginia, where he was known as Jost Hite.

Several families of the 1709 immigration were from Mosbach.  In 1717, George Utz and his wife, Barbara, came on to Virginia (expecting, though, to go to Pennsylvania).  Though George Utz attended church in H�ffenhardt, his wedding bans were published in Mosbach.  Two families came from Massenbach in 1709.

In 1709, 1713, and 1717, the emigration of just one individual from a village was rare.  Usually, there would be more than one family from the village, or cluster of villages.  Many times these families were related, see the case of the Neuenb�rg emigrants in 1717.  The group provided courage to the individual members.

Very often the fact that individuals emigrated from a village in 1709, led to additional emigrations in the following years.  We saw this clearly in Oberfischbach (and the neighboring Trupbach) and in Neuenb�rg.  It is unfair to separate the emigrations in the different years into separate activities.  It is better to regard all of the emigrations as one continuing pattern.  After the first group left from a region, it would be the talk of many villages.  There were no secrets; the news was widely shared.  The knowledge that earlier families and individuals had left, and, in many cases, had been successful, would have encouraged the later people.

(This is a continuation of the thoughts in Beyond Germanna, page 36ff.)
(28 Jun 04)

The last notes (now several days old) pertained to the 1709 emigration of Germans.  I used, as a source, Walter Knittle's "Early Eighteenth Century Palatine Emigration", which was published in 1937, but is still available.  Knittle attempted to bring together, in published form, as much information as he could concerning the actual names of individual emigrants.  In London, in the Public Record Office (PRO), he discovered, but not as the first to do so, a series of lists pertaining to this first large-scale movement of Germans who intended to go to American shores.  This is a major work of extreme importance.

There is no complete listing of all of the emigrants in 1709, so students should be alert for any additions to the known information.

After their journey down the Rhine River (to the north), these Germans assembled at Rotterdam, awaiting transportation to Queen Anne's London.  They moved to London in a series of sailings which began in early May 1709.  By the end of July, at least six such departures had occurred.  Embarkation Lists, except for the first sailing, have been preserved in the Public Record Office.  So, these lists omit anyone who left in the first departure, perhaps almost a thousand people, or anyone who left after July 1709.  They would also omit anyone who paid their own way or went by private charity (the Hans Herr party of this year paid their own way and are not included, for example).  The five Lists from Holland refer to 10,017 individuals, of whom 2,861 are named.  The difference in these numbers is that wives and children are not named.  For example, in the Sixth Departure List, there are Peter Heydee, wife and one child, among many Nassau names.

These Germans tarried near London for nearly eight months while the English government formulated plans.  Early in this period, two German pastors, John Tribbeko and George Andrew Ruperti, compiled a list for the Board of Trade of the names of Germans, showing also their ages, occupations, and family composition, including the sex and ages of their children.

There were four of these London Lists and none were made after June 15, 1709.  Therefore, they include the missing first shipment from Rotterdam, but none of the people in the last three Holland Lists are given, nor are any of the people who left Holland after 28 July 1709.  These London Lists are also in the Public Record Office.  These London Lists were published in the "New York Genealogical and Biographical Record" on the 200th anniversary of their original compilation.  Then, Lou D. MacWethy published these names in an alphabetical form, with some inaccuracies, in 1933.  These London Lists detail 6,520 persons, of whom 1,770 are named.
(07 Jul 04)

John P. Dern recognized that more information about the 1709 emigration could be found in the London Church Books.  He published his findings in �London Churchbooks and the German Emigration of 1709�, a small book which was published in 1968 in both German and English.  There were three German Lutheran Churches located in London with extant records.  One yields nothing, a second makes a passing reference to a limited number of Palatines, but the third provides a goldmine of information concerning names and origins of some of the emigrants passing through London.  Dern�s book reproduces this information.

Why were there German Lutheran Churches in London?  First, a number of Germans lived in London.  The story of one such individual was told in Beyond Germanna in connection with a history of the Germanna Lotspeich family.  These Germans wanted a church in their native language.  Then, Queen Anne�s husband, Prince George of Denmark, was of German ancestry and a Lutheran.  Pastor Tribbeko, one of the compilers of the �London Lists�, served as Prince George's personal chaplain.  Nothing remains of the pages of the Royal Chapel Church Book for the year 1709, even though the chapel was still active in 1709.  (Prince George died in 1708, but the chapel remained in use for many more years).

From the Hamburg, or German Lutheran, Church in Great Trinity Lane an older and larger Church Book remains.  There are a few references that could pertain to the 1709 Germans.  The third Church Book from the Savoy German Lutheran Church in the Strand provides a different picture.  There is a significant amount of information concerning many of the visiting Palatines.  Parents� names are given systematically and often the point of origin in Germany is given.  The book covers the period 1694 to 1771.  The entries are made in a neat German script, in chronological order, without regard to whether the entry pertained to a baptism, marriage, or death.  This book was temporarily lost and an attempt was made to reconstruct its contents, but the original was found and is the source to be used.  Entries were averaging about eight or nine per year until 1709, when they increase to 62 in 1709, and 24 in 1710, with an average of 14 per year thereafter, until a small second emigration wave occurred in 1717 (more about this information later).

Dern presented in his book a translation of the entries for 1709 through 1711.  A copy of this book has been made available to me by Mary Doyle Johnson, for which I am appreciative.
(08 Jul 04)

There are definitely other sources of information about the people in the 1709 emigration.  These people were divided into groups which went to different destinations.  The largest group, of about 3000 people, went to New York.  The Rev. Friederich H�ger of Oberfischbach went with this group as an ordained Church of England pastor.  The New York group arrived in eleven ships at New York City in the spring and summer of 1710 and were settled along the Hudson River to work on naval stores.  Governor Hunter kept records of his payments for their subsistence during their first two years in America.  These lists of names are in the Public Records Office, but have been reproduced widely.  They detail some 850 families by names.

Ulrich Simmendinger, who came with the group in 1710, returned to Germany after his children died.  He published, in 1717, in Germany, the names of the Germans who were now distributed in New York at several locations along the Hudson River, and along the Schoharie River, which is off the Hudson River; and, in New Jersey, along the Raritan River.  2,047 individuals are included with 817 listed by names.

The really large study of these New York immigrants was done by Hank Z Jones in the two volume book, �The Palatine Families of New York�, and in �More Palatine Families�.  Using the Holland Lists, the London Lists, the Hunter Lists, and the Simmendinger List, he attempted to identify the German names (not easy since the spelling were made by Dutch, English, and German writers) and their history in Germany.  This latter aspect required the services of a researcher in Germany to examine the church parish registers.  On the whole, this was a very successful project.  In addition, he made use of the church records in New York.

One of the principles that he used very successfully in locating the people in Germany was that the Germans associated in their endeavors with people from their own village or district in Germany.  The homes of a few were known from sources such as the London Lists.  Names on lists which were close or adjacent to a person with a known point of origin had a good chance of being from the same locality.

[Jones� work, which emphasized this principle of association, was appearing at just about the time that I became interested in the German Lutheran Church in the Robinson River Valley of Virginia.  As I read the baptismal and communion lists, I could see that the principle of association with relatives was especially strong.  Further study convinced me that this principle¹ could be used to state relationships which had been unknown earlier.]
(09 Jul 04)

¹(John Blankenbaker acknowledges the use of Baptismal and Communion Lists by Jones, but does not take the deserved credit for realizing that this extremely important principle could also be used in almost all Germanna genealogical quests.  John, alone, has successfully applied this principle to the Lists from the "Hebron" Church Records, and from many, many other sources, in America, in England, in Holland, and in Germany.  It is HIS application of the "principle" that has opened many new doors to discovering the relationships of the Germanna families in Virginia.  GWD)

Another large group of the 1709 German immigrants who made it to London was sent to Ireland, where many became tenants of Sir Thomas Southwell, near Rathkeale in County Limerick.  Many of these Germans worked their way back to London and eventually found passage to America.  A significant number remained in Ireland where they preserved their German characteristics for two hundred years.  Their story was told by Hank Z Jones in his small book "The Palatine Families of Ireland".

Another large group of the 1709 Germans was distributed throughout England in villages.  Very few of these people stayed in that situation though.  Most came back to London, and many of these found their way to America, especially to Pennsylvania.

Another group of about six hundred Germans was sent to North Carolina under the leadership of Christoph von Graffenried.  There was a significant loss of lives on the trip, and in the war with the Indians.  Their story had been told very incompletely until recently, when the three volume book by Henry Z Jones, Jr., and Lewis B. Rohrbach, was published (entitled "Even More Palatine Families", Rockport, Maine: Picton Press, 2002.

Some others of the Germans were sent to Jamaica and the West Indies.  (Bermuda may have been the destination of some.)  Finally, many of the Germans were sent back to Germany, especially the declared Catholics.  Some of the Catholic Germans, knowing that their chances of being sent to America were weakened by their Catholic faith, declared for a Protestant religion or simply disguised their Catholicism.  Lists of returning Catholics are in the Public Record Office.

The emigration of the 1709 is well documented in many records, though it will always be incomplete.  In comparison to other years, especially for individuals, more has been recorded about them.  One point to be made here is that one has to look in many places to find the information.  Some of the locations of data are not always obvious.

Though it is by no means the only source, the Public Record Office has a lot of information on the 1709 immigration.  It also has information from before 1709 which pertains to the Germanna Colonies.  This latter information is very important for understanding the reasons that the First Germanna Colony led to the Second Germanna Colony, and then to the immigration of associated families, from the same general areas in Germany, from about 1718 to about 1735.  Only by putting these events into the proper context can the specific events be understood.
(10 Jul 04)

The following report is based on the work of Sandra Yelton, who made copies of the original in London; on the interpretation of Andreas Mielke; and on the translation of John Blankenbaker.  The final result was published in Beyond Germanna on page 905ff.  The Church referred to here is the German Lutheran Church, St. Mary le Savoy/Strand.  This Church has the most records of any of the German Churches in London, and it had a long life due to its service to the German population who were living in London.  The parishioners included well-placed Germans in the diplomatic service, and more humble people.  Some of the records refer to mixed marriages, i.e., English and German.

The period of time is the summer of 1717, when members of the Second Germanna Colony were waiting for their ship "Scott" while Captain Tarbett was in debtors� prison.  Let us look at a baptismal record for 5 August 1717.  The father was Johann Seitz, a Pfaltzer, and the mother was Anna Maria.  The child was Johann Christoph.  The sponsors were Christoph Zimmerman, Hanss J�rgen (i.e., George) Scheibeler, and Magdalena Niederman.

Since the Second Colony had a Christopher Zimmerman and a George Scheible, and since they were in London at this time, we are inclined to believe that these two sponsors are members of the Second Colony.  If so, then that raises the question of whether Johann and Anna Maria Seitz had intended to go also to America (i.e., Pennsylvania).  And, the third sponsor, Magdalena Niederman, also becomes an object for our curiosity.

On 31 August, Matthias Schmidt and his wife Regina Cathrina brought their baby son, born on the 29th and named Johann, to be baptized.  The sponsors were Johann Georg Forckel and Maria Sophia Steiner.  Matthias Schmidt is identified as a Pfaltzer.  Since his name and his wife�s name are perfect matches to the known records in Gemmingen, we believe these are Second Colony members.  Note that in this case that the word Pfaltzer is probably a synonym for �German�, and not the actual identification of the point of origin.  This could also be the case for the Seitz baptism.

On the same day another baptism took place for a girl born also on the 29th of August.  The parents were Johann Georg F�rckel and Susanna.  The baby girl was Maria Barbara, and her sponsors were Matthias Schmidt and Maria Barbara Weiland.  Matthias Schmidt and Johann Georg Forckel could have traded roles as sponsors because they were both at the church at, presumably, the same time.  Still, we are left with the feeling that Forckel and Schmidt might have been friends or relatives.  And we are left with the question of �what happened to the Forckel/F�rckel family?�
(12 Jul 04)

Another church record from London that is of extreme interest to us was a record of the baptism of the baby girl, Dorothea Koch, the daughter of Johann Michael Koch and Barbara, both Pfaltzers.  Dorothea was born on 8 September and baptized on 9 September.  Her sponsors were Henrich Schneider and Maria Eleanora Scheibel.  Every name in this record is known to us.  The Cooks were from Schwaigern.  The Kochs, Henry Schneider, and Maria Eleanora Scheibel were from different villages, and probably had not known each other before they left their homes.

It is an assumption that the Dorothy Koch/Cook here is the same as the Dorothy Cook in Virginia.  Due to the practice of using a given name again, especially when the first of a given name has died, it may be the case that the baby baptized in London is not the one known in Virginia, but unless there is some reason to doubt it, it would assume there is only one Dorothy.

Some of the other records pertain to individuals that are not known to us, or are about individuals of which we are uncertain.  For example, on 4 August a baby boy was born to Hanss Nicolay Weiss, a Pfaltzer, and his wife Anna Cathrina.  The boy was named J�rgen (George) Adam.  His sponsors were J�rgen Meyer (actually Meler) and Hans Adam Rausch.  The two sponsors� names draw our attention.  The Meyer name, with an umlauted �y� (�) could be read as Meier, which is coming close enough to Mayer or Moyer to be of special interest, especially with the first name of George.  As we read the German church records, we would want to keep the names Weiss, Meier, and Rausch in mind.  The name Hans Adam Rausch duplicates the name of one of the sons of John Rausch, or Rouse, in Virginia (or Rush, in North Carolina).

Some of the church records would seem to pertain to Germans who were residents in London, perhaps there only temporarily.  For example, Jacob Borman and his wife Carlotha Magdal[ena] had their son Diedrich Jacob baptized (18 August).  The sponsors were Richard Stabeler (written in English letters), Diedrich Funcke, and Aramintas Davis (written in English letters).  Because Herr Funcke could not attend, Herr Scheible answered in his place.  [In reading a longer history than is being reported here, there seemed to be a Mr. Scheible who lived in London, and he is to be distinguished from the Second Colony Scheible by the use of the title �Herr� with the London resident.]  The title �Herr� is not strictly equivalent to our �Mister�.  Most German men would not have any title, and only the more significant members of the community were accorded the title of "Herr".  At Gemmingen, the mayor, the school teacher, the pastors, and all of the men named Gemmingen were called "Herr", but not the Webers, Klaars, or Schmidts.

(In other words, if one had no special standing in a community, and was just another "John Doe", he would not be called "Mister Scheible" or "Mister Funcke"; he would just be known as "Scheible" or "Funcke".  As John says, "Herr" ("Mister"), at that time, was not applied to every male; it was applied only to those men who had a "standing" in the community.  GWD)
(13 Jul 04)

I remain fascinated by the records at the Savoy German Lutheran Church in London.  Let me give one baptismal record again:

29 August [1717].  Born to Johann Georg F�rckel, his baby girl, baptized on the 31st [at the same time as another child belonging to Matthias Schmidt] and named Maria Barbara.  Sponsors:  Matthias Schmidt and Maria Barbara Weiland.  The mother�s name was Susanna.

In Virginia, we know a Maria Barbara Weiland who was the wife of Thomas Weiland [Wayland].  Taken with the other names who are known arrivals in Virginia in 1717, this suggests that the Weilands should have arrived also in 1717.  Thomas Weiland had his first land patent in 1728, two years after most of the other people who arrived in 1717 had their initial land patents.  This, and other events, suggests that he did not arrive with the members of the so-called Second Germanna Colony.  Yet, he appears to have been in London in 1717 with people who are known members of the group we call the Second Colony.

We now know that not all of the Germans who reached London in 1717 were able to go on to America immediately.  The English, rather than allowing them to stay in England, sent (or proposed to send) them back to Rotterdam.  Some of the returnees in 1717 were later Germanna emigrants to America.  For example, one list in 1717 of people being sent back to Rotterdam shows two adjacent names, Christopher Uhl and Frederick Kapler, who came to Virginia later.  The Colony of 1717 would have been larger had these families been able to go to America when they intended.  There may be other names in the same category, but more research is needed.  The best available source for these names is the (three volumes) book by Henry Z Jones, Jr. and Lewis B. Rohrbach, entitled �Even More Palatine Families�.  [This information was contributed by Andreas Mielke and Sandra Yelton, to a note in Beyond Germanna, on page 917].

We are able to draw the conclusion that the so-called Second Germanna Colony would have been larger had all of the Germans in London been able to go on to America.  We see that three families are in this category, the Waylands, the Yowells, and Kablers (to use their American names.)  I suspect there are more names that should be added to this short list.  One family that is a likely candidate was that of Johann Michael Willheit.  He seems to have disappeared from the Schwaigern church records before the summer of 1717, yet, like Thomas Wayland, he did not have his land patent in America until 1728.  This suggests that the family was stranded in London and had to wait a couple of years.  Whether they remained in England or returned briefly to Germany is unknown.

Why were all of the Germans in London in the summer of 1717 not taken to America?  I believe that either Captain Tarbett�s ship (the "Scott") was too small to take all that wanted to go, or, that the �order� from Gov. Spotswood for a shipload of Germans was limited to about 80 people.
(14 Jul 04)

After the last Note, there was an inquiry as to what the Germans did in London in the summer of 1717.  There is good information in an unpublished letter to the London Clergy in December of 1734, written by Rev. Johann Caspar Stoever.  The original of the letter is in the Francke-Nachlass der Staatbibliothek zu Berlin-Preussicher Kulturbesitz (Microfilm No. 18, 363-365).  Petra Stallboerger, Dipl. Bibl., assisted Andreas Mielke in finding this letter, which Andreas translated and published in Beyond Germanna (p. 845).  The occasion for writing the letter was when Stoever, Michael Hold, and Michael Smith were first in London on their fund-raising trip.  Since the events described here were before Stoever's time, we must assume that the sources for the information were Hold and Smith, who were in London in the summer of 1717.

"Seventeen years ago, a small group of Protestant Lutheran people - from the high principality of Wuerttemberg, and the Qualtzbach [unidentified] and the Electorate Palatinate - arrived here in London, and had themselves transported to Virginia on their expenses.  Before their departure, however, they consulted with the Reverend Protestant Lutheran German preachers then present here regarding the future care of their souls.  To this they added the most obedient request, to be so inclined and assist them in this matter by sending a pastor and by organizing a Christian contribution toward a divine service, the construction of a church, and such.  To this, the above-mentioned Reverend Clergy also showed themselves not only to be inclined but, with the distribution of the Holy Communion, obliged them very sternly and according to duty to remain most constantly with the Protestant Lutheran truth.  They assured them after news had been received of their fortunate transfer they would grant them their petition."

[Note that Virginia is mentioned as the destination, but later comments by members of the congregation make it clear that Pennsylvania was the destination, and that the ship's captain betrayed them and took them instead to Virginia.  The story told to the London Clergy in 1734 simplified the history and gave only the net result.  Note also that a literal reading of this says that they paid their own transportation in London.  If so, this may be a reason that some of the Germans did not board the ship "Scott" in the fall of 1717.  They perhaps did not have the passage money.]

"After arrival of these people in Virginia [and] as soon as it was possible after surviving the hard Servitude (to which most of whom who go there have to submit themselves because they are unable to pay their transport), they settled as feudal tenants [Lehns Leute] on the then Governor Spotswood's land."

Some of the Germans in London in September of 1717 were at the Lutheran Church then.  When they actually left London is unknown.  One report says that some of the Germans had spent eight weeks in London.  We know that some of them left their home (Gemmingen) in late July.  Allowing about four weeks to get from their home to London, which was typical, they would have arrived in late August.  Two months after that would have been late October.

Voyages across the Atlantic in the westerly direction typically took about ten weeks.  From late October, the ten weeks would have ended very close to January 1.  In the English-speaking world, whether they landed on December 31 or on January 1 would make no difference as to the year of their arrival.  They would have said 1717 and they would have been correct.  By the modern calendar, we would say 1718 if they arrived on January 1 or later.

The Lutheran Church which these immigrants formed takes its origination as 1717, but I had been uncertain that, by the modern calendar, they actually did arrive in 1717.  The people who claim 1717 as the foundation date had no proof that the group did arrive in Virginia before January 1.  As I have shown above, it is very doubtful that they arrived before January 1.  Still, they were not lying, because there is no doubt that they did arrive in 1717 by the calendar in use then.  But for the purpose of counting how long they have been here, it would be better to use the New Style Calendar (the one we use today) which says they probably arrived in 1718.

[I mentioned this to Klaus Wust once and he said it was impossible to correct this error because the year 1717 had been carved into too many stones.]

I now feel better about the Lutheran Church outside Madison, Virginia, saying that they were formed in 1717.  As the last note showed, the group coalesced in London and laid their plans there for the spiritual future of the group.  They obtained a promise from the Lutheran Clergy in London that they, the London Clergy, would send a minister when the group announced that they had arrived.  They attended Communion in London as a group.

So, if the Lutheran church in Madison wants to say they were formed in 1717, I will accept that, but I would add the amendment that the Church was formed in London, not in Virginia.  Though they had come from diverse villages in Germany, they came together and formed a unified body in London.  It would appear that they planned to live as a group in America where they could physically have a church building and where they would have a minister in common.
(16 Jul 04)

There is a PRO (Public Record Office) document called the "5th Return Party from England 16 Sept 1717 (OS)".  It was found by Henry Z Jones, Jr., in the Public Record Office in London, and was transcribed by Marlene Groves, CG.  It has been printed in its entirety in the multivolume book, "Even More Palatine Families".  The document is a list of names in the form of a petition, headed by the statement:

"A Liste of Those Poor Palatines, Wirtembergers, Etc. Who Are Willing to Return into Germany, and Humbly Desiring His Majesty's Most Gracious Bounty, for Their Transportation into Holland, for Their Charges to Their Own Country, Taken the 16th September 1717."

There follows the names of 51 heads of families and the number of people in each family unit for a total of 200 people.  We do not know, in spite of the title given to the document, whether the petition was successful, as there is no record of the decision by the English government on the petition.

Of the Germans present in London in late 1717, we know some came to Virginia, others were present in the London Church Records, and other names are on the petition above.  The people who did not embark on the ship "Scott" are represented by the unknowns in the church records and by those who petitioned for financial aid to return to England.

Three parties are headed by Christofle Uhl, Frederic Kapler, and Hans George Long on the 1717 petition.  We know that all three of these people did go to Virginia shortly after the group that went in 1717.  Though their names are on the petition for financial support to return to Germany, it is more likely they did not return to Germany but stayed in England until they found transportation to America.  Their experience supports the idea that the petition was not accepted and that the petitioners remained in England, except that some individuals found their own way back to Germany, or other places.

I would emphasize that the known people on the ship "Scott", and the list of names on the petition, are not a complete list of the Germans present late in the summer of 1717, since there are other names of Germans in the London Church Records.  And then we should add those whose names appear on no record.

The question is posed, "Should Christopher Yowell, Frederick Kabler, and George Long be counted as members of the Second Colony?" They left Germany at the same time as other Second Colony members did, but their passage to the New World was delayed for a couple of years.  Michael Willheit, in my estimation, may be in this category also.
(17 Jul 04)